Effects of smoking on respiratory function and exercise performance in asbestos workers

Our plain-English summary of Effects of smoking on respiratory function and exercise performance in asbestos workers, by X. Wang, S. Araki, E. Yano, et al (Industrial Health, 1995).

The study

• Authors: X. Wang, S. Araki, E. Yano, M. Wang, Z. Wang
• Journal: Industrial Health
• Published: 1995;33(4):173-80
• Cited by: 2 articles, as counted by NIH iCite
• Read it: PubMed · Publisher

Abstract

To determine the role of smoking in the development of pulmonary impairment in asbestos workers, 66 nonsmoking asbestos workers and 70 smoking asbestos workers were studied. Occupational and medical questionnaires, lung function and exercise test were conducted in all subjects. The frequencies of dyspnea and cough on questions were significantly higher in the smoking workers than those in nonsmoking workers. Similarly, FEV1, FEV1/FVC and DLco were significantly lower in the smoking workers. Exercise performance showed that the smoking workers had higher index of dyspnea and lower breathing reserve, Vo2 and Vo2 max than nonsmoking workers did. We concluded that cigarette smoking has marked effects on both of respiratory function and exercise performance in asbestos workers. Among them, smokers show more serious obstructive impairment in static lung function testing and more significant limitation during exercise. The history of cigarette smoking deserves close attention in the evaluation of pulmonary impairment from asbestos exposure.

In plain English

This study compared lung function and exercise performance in asbestos workers who smoked and who had never smoked. The workers were men at a Chinese asbestos products plant that had used chrysotile to make asbestos textile and shingle since 1950, and they were examined in 1993. Workers with definite or suspected asbestosis on chest X-ray were excluded. The study included 66 never-smokers and 70 randomly selected current smokers, all exposed to asbestos for at least 3 years. More smokers than nonsmokers reported dyspnea (44 versus 30) and cough (49 versus 23), and these differences were statistically significant. Smokers had significantly lower FEV1, DLco and FEV1/FVC (mean 66.6 in smokers, 74.6 in nonsmokers). Differences in VC and FVC were not significant. Abnormal FEV1/FVC was found in 39 smokers and 13 nonsmokers. During cycle exercise, effort was similar in both groups, but smokers had a higher index of dyspnea and lower breathing reserve and oxygen uptake. The authors concluded that cigarette smoking had marked effects on respiratory function and exercise performance in these asbestos workers.

We wrote this plain-English summary from the full article with the help of AI, and a second AI model checked each sentence against the article. It is not the authors' wording; the abstract and the article are their own account.

What the study did and found

• Design: Cross-sectional comparison of smoking and never-smoking asbestos workers, using questionnaires, lung function tests and cycle exercise testing
• Who was studied: Male employees of a Chinese asbestos products manufacturer, examined in 1993. Of 320 workers, 136 were analyzed: 66 never-smokers and 70 randomly selected current smokers (at least 2 pack-years). Workers with definite or suspected asbestosis were excluded. Workers with pleural changes alone were kept in the study.
• Exposure: Chrysotile used to produce asbestos textile and asbestos shingle since 1950. Total asbestos dust in work areas almost always exceeded 4 mg/m3. All workers had at least 3 years of occupational exposure. Smokers smoked 2 to 40 pack-years.
• Main results:
  • Dyspnea was reported by 44 smokers and 30 nonsmokers. Cough was reported by 49 smokers and 23 nonsmokers. Chest pain was reported by 37 smokers and 25 nonsmokers. Only the differences for dyspnea and cough were statistically significant.
  • VC and FVC were lower in smokers, but the differences were not significant. FEV1 and DLco were significantly lower in smokers.
  • Mean FEV1/FVC was 74.6 in nonsmokers and 66.6 in smokers, a significant difference.
  • Abnormal FEV1/FVC (below 70%) was found in 13 of 66 nonsmokers and 39 of 70 smokers. Low DLco (below 80%) was found in 5 nonsmokers and 16 smokers.
  • Effort during exercise was similar: nonsmokers averaged 5.8 minutes and 116.2 watts, smokers 5.6 minutes and 112.8 watts.
  • Smokers had a higher index of dyspnea and lower breathing reserve, Vo2 and Vo2max. VE and VEmax were slightly higher in smokers, but not significantly.
• The authors' conclusion: The authors concluded that cigarette smoking had marked effects on respiratory function and exercise performance in asbestos-exposed workers. They found more serious obstructive impairment and more exercise limitation in smokers. They said smoking history deserves close attention when evaluating pulmonary impairment from asbestos exposure.

Topics

Medical terms in this study, explained in our Lexicon: Dyspnea, FEV1, FEV1/FVC Ratio, Diffusing Capacity (DLCO), Asbestos Exposure.

Related studies

• Lung function and exercise performance in smoking and nonsmoking asbestos-exposed workers — D.Y. Sue, A. Oren, et al. (1985)
• Exercise training to improve exercise capacity and quality of life in people with non-malignant dust-related respiratory diseases — M.T. Dale, Z.J. McKeough, et al. (2015)
• Adverse effects of asbestos exposure and smoking on lung function — X. Wang, E. Yano, et al. (2006)
• Longitudinal pattern of reported respiratory symptoms and accelerated ventilatory loss in asbestos-exposed workers — C.A. Brodkin, S. Barnhart, et al. (1996)
• The evidence of benefits of exercise training in interstitial lung disease: a randomised controlled trial — L.M. Dowman, C.F. McDonald, et al. (2017)
• Pulmonary function, smoking habits, and high resolution computed tomography (HRCT) early abnormalities of lung and pleural fibrosis in shipyard workers exposed to asbestos — S. Neri, P. Boraschi, et al. (1996)

Browse more research in Industrial Health, or return to medical research.